Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36050773›Full record

ArticleChild and adolescent psychiatry and mental health2022

Validation and standardization of the Childhood Trauma Screener (CTS) in the general population.

Andreas Witt, Yusuf Öz, Cedric Sachser, Elmar Brähler, Heide Glaesmer, Jörg M Fegert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Child and adolescent psychiatry and mental health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. A Novel Diathesis-Stress Model of Comorbid Early Onset Psychiatric Disorders.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Andreas WittDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry/Psychotherapy, Ulm University, Steinhövelstr.1, 89075, Ulm, Germany.
Yusuf ÖzDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry/Psychotherapy, Ulm University, Steinhövelstr.1, 89075, Ulm, Germany. yusuf.oez@uniklinik-ulm.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0180-9488
Cedric SachserDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry/Psychotherapy, Ulm University, Steinhövelstr.1, 89075, Ulm, Germany.
Elmar BrählerIntegrated Research and Treatment Center Adiposity Diseases, Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University of Leipzig Medical Center, Leipzig, Germany.
Heide GlaesmerDepartment of Medical Psychology and Medical Sociology, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
Jörg M FegertDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry/Psychotherapy, Ulm University, Steinhövelstr.1, 89075, Ulm, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundA valid, quick and widely applicable retrospective screening tool for child maltreatment is of great importance to better adapt interventions and treatments. The Childhood Trauma Screener (CTS), derived from the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ), is one such instrument that aims to increase the likelihood of detecting mental and physical disorders that have manifested in adulthood as a result of traumatic experiences and maltreatment in childhood and adolescence. The present study aimed to investigate the psychometric properties of the CTS and generate normative data.

methodsData from two representative surveys were combined. Both surveys used identical methods. The CTS, consisting of five items, other self-report instruments, and demographic characteristics were used. Construct validity was examined using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). A subsample was used to examine convergent validity with the Adverse Childhood Experiences Questionnaire (ACE). Normative data are reported for age groups and gender.

resultsA total of 5039 study participants provided valid responses to the 5-items questionnaire (54.3% female, response rate = 78.9%). CFA showed good fit indices for a 2-factor solution. Convergent validity was generally supported by moderate intercorrelations with the ACE.

conclusionsThe results confirm the solid psychometric properties of the CTS as an easy-to-use, ultra-short retrospective measure of child maltreatment. The data can be used to compare sample or individual results with reference data provided.

Indexed as

Childhood Trauma Screener (CTS)Child maltreatmentNormative dataScreeningStandardizationValidation

Identifiers

PMID36050773
PMCPMC9438230

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.